Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Unsure about coming backFollow

#1 Jan 03 2012 at 8:51 PM Rating: Good
Hey all, I made an account here to ask this. I've been debating it for a while but I think I want to come back to WoW. I've played on and off for years, last time I played was during Wotlk and I was main tanking progression in Ulduar I think it was called. It was too time consuming so I started to PvP instead. After a while I just quit.

I really loved progression raiding, especially tanking but I won't go back to that now because of how much time it takes. I don't want to do raiding casually, either I want to be on the top of the game or not do it.

So I'm thinking of coming back just for PvP, semi-casually. Problably playing 3-4 hours most days. Some days not at all, some days more.

How much has the game changed since early wotlk? I don't want to feel like I don't know anything and I'm just a "noob" again, but I also don't want to be into it like I used to. I spent a lot of hours looking at elitist jerks, reading graphs etc. I don't want to do that anymore. I just want to do some basic PvP.

Do you guys think that playing this casual way is worth it for an old hardcore player? I'm used to being in top server guilds and playing constantly. Will it just feel akward to come back and just play casually?
#2 Jan 03 2012 at 9:20 PM Rating: Excellent
**
656 posts
For PVP purposes there was a pretty "big" change in that professions making armor pieces actually got upgraded when the PVP-gear/season reset to apply as starter pieces for the new season, pretty big as PVP isn't enjoyable without resilience gear.

Talent trees got whacked to be shorter, in "theory" chasing after less cookie-cutter builds but there's even less "choice" in them so... simplified, good when you're playing 10 classes at various levels, not so good when you're wanting to do your own thing while improving your character.

It's still a time suck, Christmas event just ended where I worked on achievements with 7 characters... as much time in that as some of my raiding friends put into raiding over the 2 weeks the holiday was on. Still incomplete on 4 of the 7 too because they are too low level.

3-4 hours a day? that's not casual lol I'm lucky to get 3-4 hours a week right now :P
#3 Jan 03 2012 at 9:28 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,996 posts
Really, it depends on why you're coming back. If you want something fun to fill time and relax, it should work. New tools let you do random dungeons and even a couple of simplified raids. If you like tanking, you'll have faster queue times and you'll get some extra goodies. With that said, they'll still be PUGs. They're not going to be world class anything, except for the occasional world class fluster cluck. How awkward that will feel is purely up to the sort of person you are.

Blizzard is simplifying the talent trees (they've already done so and will go further next expansion) and rotations are more of a priority system these days. It is good to read up on boss strategies, to have a general idea of how to optimize your gear and to understand the quirks of your class and spec; however, you shouldn't need to spend hours studying to accomplish that.

Is it worth it? Where else would you plan on getting 3-4 hours of amusement a day for $15 a month?
#4 Jan 03 2012 at 9:31 PM Rating: Excellent
**
656 posts
Rhodekylle wrote:


Is it worth it? Where else would you plan on getting 3-4 hours of amusement a day for $15 a month?


AH my famous comeback when a buddy derides me for not attending his evening at the bar (really I'll just drink at home, get 4x the beer for the price even buying retail) where he plans to drop $100+ before tips and will do so again tomorrow night... my $15 goes a LONG way to providing worthwhile entertainment.
#5 Jan 05 2012 at 12:43 AM Rating: Good
*****
19,369 posts
Rhodekylle wrote:
Is it worth it? Where else would you plan on getting 3-4 hours of amusement a day for $15 a month?


You'd be surprised what a desperate ***** will do in these troubled times.
#6 Jan 07 2012 at 6:52 PM Rating: Excellent
MentalFrog wrote:
Rhodekylle wrote:
Is it worth it? Where else would you plan on getting 3-4 hours of amusement a day for $15 a month?


You'd be surprised what a desperate ***** will do in these troubled times.

You said you needed the money. And I had some!
#7 Jan 07 2012 at 8:25 PM Rating: Good
***
3,441 posts
TerryC wrote:
I really loved progression raiding, especially tanking but I won't go back to that now because of how much time it takes. I don't want to do raiding casually, either I want to be on the top of the game or not do it.


Good news for you, Looking for Raid (LFR) has been implemented. Similar to Looking for Dungeon, it allows you to specify a role, and you wait for it to fill the group and bam. Instant Raid. No Guild Needed. LFR raids are a little easier than the Normal Modes, but it still allows you to see bosses and scenery, as well as get some modest gear.

Quote:
So I'm thinking of coming back just for PvP, semi-casually. Problably playing 3-4 hours most days. Some days not at all, some days more.


There are some new Battlegrounds you might want to try, other than that, not sure what to say as I don't PvP much, usually only for Holiday achievements and occasionally to slowly work towards buying the honor mounts.

Quote:
How much has the game changed since early wotlk? I don't want to feel like I don't know anything and I'm just a "noob" again, but I also don't want to be into it like I used to. I spent a lot of hours looking at elitist jerks, reading graphs etc. I don't want to do that anymore. I just want to do some basic PvP.


They streamlined equipment, so that you won't have to do huge amounts of homework. Watching a couple Tankspot videos and browsing class forums to get a general idea of what your class wants is all you really need to do. They made equipment choices a lot easier to make, they streamlined a lot of things, and now it is fairly easy to just jump right in and play as long as you have a general idea of how your class should play.

Quote:
Do you guys think that playing this casual way is worth it for an old hardcore player? I'm used to being in top server guilds and playing constantly. Will it just feel akward to come back and just play casually?


I've never been a hardcore player, but I will say that there's plenty to do, though for the first few months, you might be caught up in trying to get your reps up, and unlock areas, trying to get Level 85, etc. Some of the new questing areas are simply awesome (I loved each one of them the first few times I went through them). They tell nice stories, the Molten Front dailies are awesome, for example.

I'd suggest getting a 6-month subscription if you've got the money and see where it takes you, and make your ultimate decision after playing some Cataclysm.

They changed a lot of stuff, if you need help ask around the boards. No graph studying needed, though a lot of classes were changed, some new mechanics were added, etc. Sometimes it is nice to have a hint or three as a helping hand when everything is new.
#8 Jan 07 2012 at 10:05 PM Rating: Excellent
MentalFrog wrote:
Rhodekylle wrote:
Is it worth it? Where else would you plan on getting 3-4 hours of amusement a day for $15 a month?


You'd be surprised what a desperate ***** will do in these troubled times.


That just makes me think of that chick who supposedly exchanged sex for the 5k gold to get her epic flying back during BC.
#9 Jan 08 2012 at 7:23 AM Rating: Good
***
3,441 posts
PigtailsOfDoom wrote:
MentalFrog wrote:
Rhodekylle wrote:
Is it worth it? Where else would you plan on getting 3-4 hours of amusement a day for $15 a month?


You'd be surprised what a desperate ***** will do in these troubled times.


That just makes me think of that chick who supposedly exchanged sex for the 5k gold to get her epic flying back during BC.


Well, if the guy were reasonably clean hygiene-wise, and they used protection, why not? *shrugs* Just as long as they didn't tell anybody (would that be considered prostitution by law?).

I'd have to say though, but for the girl, she did what, a couple hours in bed and got weeks, maybe months worth of gold farming in return?

That's a helluva profit.

I saw a follow-up post made by her on that craigslist page, which implies that she enjoyed the sex enough to ask the guy for an encore, even.
#10 Jan 08 2012 at 10:00 AM Rating: Good
***
1,877 posts
Lyrailis wrote:
PigtailsOfDoom wrote:
MentalFrog wrote:
Rhodekylle wrote:
Is it worth it? Where else would you plan on getting 3-4 hours of amusement a day for $15 a month?


You'd be surprised what a desperate ***** will do in these troubled times.


That just makes me think of that chick who supposedly exchanged sex for the 5k gold to get her epic flying back during BC.


Well, if the guy were reasonably clean hygiene-wise, and they used protection, why not? *shrugs* Just as long as they didn't tell anybody (would that be considered prostitution by law?).

I'd have to say though, but for the girl, she did what, a couple hours in bed and got weeks, maybe months worth of gold farming in return?

That's a helluva profit.

I saw a follow-up post made by her on that craigslist page, which implies that she enjoyed the sex enough to ask the guy for an encore, even.


Still makes her a ***** in the long run.

I can't be the only one here that views sex as a deep level of bonding between two people. Am I? Smiley: confused
#11 Jan 08 2012 at 11:21 AM Rating: Excellent
***
1,996 posts
Quote:
I can't be the only one here that views sex as a deep level of bonding between two people. Am I?


Had the young man who responded to her ad been a would be suitor who tried to intrigue her with a gift suited to her interests, I doubt anything would have been said -- even if his actions were in response to heavy hinting on her part.

Sex is sex; money is money. There are times that we like to turn a blind eye to any possible correlation between the two and label anything that combines the two immoral. I wonder if that is necessarily the case. I propose the following purely as a hypothetical in answer to Criminy's question!

Imagine a year in which you did not give gifts to your partner. In particular, imagine that you do nothing 'special' for Valentine's Day, their birthday and other holidays. Now, contemplate your prospects of perky sex, particularly after the second lapse. You would not call your partner a *****, nor do you view yourself as paying for sex, but is the delineation quite as clear as you initially imagine?

There is sex that creates an emotional bond. Sometimes that bond is greater and sometimes it is lesser. In the latter case, one may wake up after that last trip to the bar and realize that beer goggles are not just a Brewfest event. For that matter, there are young ladies whose company I treasure, but their bedroom skills would earn comments that one usually uses to describe PUGs here. In each case, there is a degree of trust and intimacy that surpasses my encounter with random people on the subway, although let it be noted that Beijing subways are often packed enough that the difference is probably four thicknesses of cloth, the lack of a condom, and the tendency for subway journeys to last easily more than half an hour of rocking and swaying.

I like fine dining, but there are times that a burger and fries will do. It has been my pleasure to share time with wonderful people; there are also nights that I remember rather fondly despite having woken up the next morning and wondered what the heck I was thinking.

#12 Jan 08 2012 at 2:59 PM Rating: Excellent
****
7,861 posts
Sex is always paid for, sometimes it's just not as obvious when you do.
____________________________
People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome. ~River Tam

Sedao
#13 Jan 08 2012 at 4:57 PM Rating: Good
Criminy wrote:


Still makes her a ***** in the long run.

I can't be the only one here that views sex as a deep level of bonding between two people. Am I? Smiley: confused


Yeah it still makes her a ***** (be definition), but that's not such a bad thing. The day that women stop being viewed as the gatekeepers of sex, will be the day that prostitution loses most of its appeal.

I'm with Rhode on this. Sometimes, sex is a deep level of bonding between two people. Sometimes it's for fun. Sometimes it's for relieving you of epic horniness. Different strokes for different folks as they say, and varying moods as well.
#14 Jan 08 2012 at 6:11 PM Rating: Good
***
3,441 posts
PigtailsOfDoom wrote:
Criminy wrote:


Still makes her a ***** in the long run.

I can't be the only one here that views sex as a deep level of bonding between two people. Am I? Smiley: confused


Yeah it still makes her a ***** (be definition), but that's not such a bad thing. The day that women stop being viewed as the gatekeepers of sex, will be the day that prostitution loses most of its appeal.

I'm with Rhode on this. Sometimes, sex is a deep level of bonding between two people. Sometimes it's for fun. Sometimes it's for relieving you of epic horniness. Different strokes for different folks as they say, and varying moods as well.


^^
This.

Some women ***** themselves because they run a monopoly on sex.

If women weren't so hard to get for your average guy, then nobody would actually pay for sex (especially since it is illegal in many places in the world). But since women play such hard to get usually, some men will go as far as to pay to get it.

Also, I agree that sex is a case-by-case basis. Sometimes you do it for fun, sometimes you do it when you're bored, sometimes you do it to bond with someone you're deeply in love with, sometimes you do it just to make a kid (hopefully when married/stable lifestyle), and other times you do it because you're just freaking horny and that hunger needs to be fed.

What the world needs (well, the USA.. dunno about other countries), is to relax a little on the subject of sex. I'm willing to bet the rape rates and prostitution arrests would drop a significant amount, if sex wasn't so taboo and if women would give it up a little more often/easier and if people would understand that sex is an ordinary part of life, every bit as much as death is.

Kinda strange how in the US, violence is A-OK to show on TV, but yet god forbid someone sees a woman's nipples. Someone getting their head blown off by a BFG is OK, as long as no actual gore is recognizable (and some movies/shows have even pushed this to limits), but yet how dare someone show some sex on TV... *rolls eyes*

Yet everywhere else in the world, it is the opposite. You see nude women in newspapers, and violence is considered horrible (which it really is), and something you shouldn't be feeding your teenagers.

The USA is a twisted, twisted place when it is more acceptable to expose teenagers to violence than it is allow them to view sex/nudity/etc.
#15 Jan 08 2012 at 6:25 PM Rating: Excellent
*
187 posts
Ya'll crack me up....in a good way! Thread goes from a person debating whether to return to WoW and within 7 replies, it's a study of sexuality, prostitution and violence versus sex on TV! (which I totally agree with that poster about US movies, TV and video games)

At this point, I'm wondering not whether the OP is returning to WoW, but on their way to the nearest brothel? :)


Edited, Jan 8th 2012 6:28pm by Seculartwo
#16 Jan 08 2012 at 6:31 PM Rating: Good
***
3,441 posts
Seculartwo wrote:
Ya'll crack me up....in a good way! Thread goes from a person debating whether to return to WoW and within 7 replies, it's a study of sexuality, prostitution and violence versus sex on TV! (which I totally agree with that poster about US movies, TV and video games)

At this point, I'm wondering not whether the OP is returning to WoW, but on their way to the nearest brothel? :)


Edited, Jan 8th 2012 6:28pm by Seculartwo


Sounds like we all need a trip to the nearest brothel. At least, those of us who aren't married and/or have a good SO to have sex with.

Edited, Jan 8th 2012 7:31pm by Lyrailis
#17 Jan 08 2012 at 7:42 PM Rating: Good
Lyrailis wrote:

Kinda strange how in the US, violence is A-OK to show on TV, but yet god forbid someone sees a woman's nipples. Someone getting their head blown off by a BFG is OK, as long as no actual gore is recognizable (and some movies/shows have even pushed this to limits), but yet how dare someone show some sex on TV... *rolls eyes*

Yet everywhere else in the world, it is the opposite. You see nude women in newspapers, and violence is considered horrible (which it really is), and something you shouldn't be feeding your teenagers.

The USA is a twisted, twisted place when it is more acceptable to expose teenagers to violence than it is allow them to view sex/nudity/etc.


This is seriously one of my biggest pet peeves about our culture. Studies have shown that it is more psychologically harmful to be exposed to violence than sexual content. It's freaking ****** up.
#18 Jan 08 2012 at 7:55 PM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
George Carlin wrote:
And uh, people much wiser than I have said, I'd rather have my son watch a film with two people making love than two people trying to kill one other. And I of course agree. I wish I knew who said it first, and I agree with that. But I would like to take it a step further. I would like to substitute the word ****, for the word kill in all those movie cliches we grew up with. 'Okay Sheriff, we're gonna **** ya now. But we're gonna **** ya slow.' So maybe next year I'll have a whole ******' rap on that word. I hope so.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#19 Jan 08 2012 at 8:59 PM Rating: Good
***
3,441 posts
PigtailsOfDoom wrote:
Lyrailis wrote:

Kinda strange how in the US, violence is A-OK to show on TV, but yet god forbid someone sees a woman's nipples. Someone getting their head blown off by a BFG is OK, as long as no actual gore is recognizable (and some movies/shows have even pushed this to limits), but yet how dare someone show some sex on TV... *rolls eyes*

Yet everywhere else in the world, it is the opposite. You see nude women in newspapers, and violence is considered horrible (which it really is), and something you shouldn't be feeding your teenagers.

The USA is a twisted, twisted place when it is more acceptable to expose teenagers to violence than it is allow them to view sex/nudity/etc.


This is seriously one of my biggest pet peeves about our culture. Studies have shown that it is more psychologically harmful to be exposed to violence than sexual content. It's freaking @#%^ed up.


And ever notice how you can freely say any form of violent word...

Kill
Murder
Disembowel
Decapitate
Poison
Dismember

And nobody cares, but yet a lot of words referring to sex, sometimes even the word "sex" itself... is taboo? You can't say the F word, oh no... it is censored on almost all forums on the internet and it is a "swear word". To even talk about sex, you have to use words that people were forced to use instead of the usual, because the usual word is suddenly "inappropriate" language. But yet, you can talk all day long about killing, murder, and all sorts of gruesome, grisly words to describe lethal violence, and you can even do so in public and very few people even care.

But damn, if you *ever* use the F word in reference to sex in the middle of a grocery store or other similar public setting... it is time for the pitchforks and torches, baby!
#20 Jan 08 2012 at 9:19 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
Lyrailis wrote:
Kinda strange how in the US, violence is A-OK to show on TV, but yet god forbid someone sees a woman's nipples. Someone getting their head blown off by a BFG is OK, as long as no actual gore is recognizable (and some movies/shows have even pushed this to limits), but yet how dare someone show some sex on TV... *rolls eyes*


There's a comic for that.

#21 Jan 08 2012 at 9:27 PM Rating: Good
***
3,441 posts
Criminy wrote:
Lyrailis wrote:
Kinda strange how in the US, violence is A-OK to show on TV, but yet god forbid someone sees a woman's nipples. Someone getting their head blown off by a BFG is OK, as long as no actual gore is recognizable (and some movies/shows have even pushed this to limits), but yet how dare someone show some sex on TV... *rolls eyes*


There's a comic for that.



Even though I'm American (sometimes I don't like to admit that online because of stuff like this), I find that hilarious. lol.
#22 Jan 08 2012 at 11:38 PM Rating: Excellent
*
187 posts
PigtailsOfDoom wrote:
Lyrailis wrote:

Kinda strange how in the US, violence is A-OK to show on TV, but yet god forbid someone sees a woman's nipples. Someone getting their head blown off by a BFG is OK, as long as no actual gore is recognizable (and some movies/shows have even pushed this to limits), but yet how dare someone show some sex on TV... *rolls eyes*

Yet everywhere else in the world, it is the opposite. You see nude women in newspapers, and violence is considered horrible (which it really is), and something you shouldn't be feeding your teenagers.

The USA is a twisted, twisted place when it is more acceptable to expose teenagers to violence than it is allow them to view sex/nudity/etc.


This is seriously one of my biggest pet peeves about our culture. Studies have shown that it is more psychologically harmful to be exposed to violence than sexual content. It's freaking @#%^ed up.


As an American, I say we should kill those in charge of that study! hehe

A lot of parents do put their foot down on toy guns though. Probably because they are worried some cop will blow their childs head off for pointing a purple water gun at them as they drive down the road.
#23 Jan 08 2012 at 11:58 PM Rating: Good
Criminy wrote:
Lyrailis wrote:
Kinda strange how in the US, violence is A-OK to show on TV, but yet god forbid someone sees a woman's nipples. Someone getting their head blown off by a BFG is OK, as long as no actual gore is recognizable (and some movies/shows have even pushed this to limits), but yet how dare someone show some sex on TV... *rolls eyes*


There's a comic for that.



That is one of my favorites featuring Brother America, actually.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 422 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (422)